The is a pseudo staged production. It seems as if on stage but is most likely filmed in a studio. It claims to mimic production techniques of the 16th century though it uses women in the female roles. I have not seen a good Tempest on DVD. This is one of two I have been able to find. Consider the lack of competition this is the better of the two, but it is not great. The acting is uneven. Efrem Zimbalist does a nice job as Prospero. It seems like most of the text is present. the speaking cadences are reasonable and it does not descend into the rapid sing song Shakespeare speech that one often hears on stage (the I can't believe I said the whole thing) type of declamation. Good luck finding it on DVD. I have a copy, but I am not sure it is still available through the usual outlets
Add a Review
-
dss-218 June 2007
-
eparis217 September 2022If there were a superb version of The Tempest, it would be possible to discard this production entirely. Until that time, the Bard has enough strengths to make it worth watching.
The filming on a stage set is well handled, and the traditional strips of fabric that serve as waves and other such stage devices make the bare boards seem more natural.
John Serry's music is good enough to notice and enjoy even in the midst of the play.
Efrem Zimbalist Jr. Is an enthusiastic Prospero whose performance often makes up in sincerity what he lacks in ability to read poetry. He certainly looks the part and frequently seems magical enough to be believable. He successfully projects both benevolence and hope.
J. E. Taylor is an attractive Miranda who is excellent except when she weeps.
William Hootkins as Caliban and Ron Palillo as Trinculo give effective if standard performances.
The worst acting comes from Nicholas Hammond (70s television's Spiderman). In this ostentatiously American film, Hammond is hampered by a British accent that would be more appropriate for Gilbert and Sullivan. -
Colkitto28 October 2004I have seldom seen such two-dimensional, amateurish acting. It's a waste of film and an insult to Shakespeare. In a village hall or as a primary school Christmas play it might just about be acceptable, but from professionals it's embarrassing.
Apparently I have to provide at least ten lines of comment, but I've said all that needs to be said and more than this travesty deserves. Everybody in it speaks with an utter lack of naturalism, as if they're trying to make the lines sound as artificial as possible. Every character is given a single note to strike, and all complexity excised; half the time the note is inappropriate, and many of the actors don't even achieve that. The idea that these sorry specimens could make a living as actors while talented people wait table for years before getting a break is sickening. -
catheadcatheadcathead23 January 2002I found this to be a fairly enjoyable presentation. I noted some familiar faces:
Prospero: Efrem Zimbalist, Jr. (The FBI- Inspector Lewis Erskine)
Trinculo: Ron Palillo (Welcome Back Kotter- Horshack)
Antonio: Ted Sorel (From Beyond- Dr. Pretorious)
Ron Palillo played Trinculo just like he played Horshack. Maybe that's the only type of character he can do? -
dlbach117 March 2018Contrary to one reviewer, I believe Mr. Shakespeare would have enjoyed this rendition of his play. Anyone can do a movie with lots of scenery and over acting. They can enhance it with computer generated imagery and sounds. However, it is a rare find of one who can film a play which is on a stage where Mr. Shakespeare intended it to be performed. William Woodman did a splendid job of making this a professional film as opposed to just putting on a play and video taping it. The staging and direction caused me to be able to sit back and imagine I was sitting with Mr. Shakespeare and, together, watching his play come to life on stage as he meant it to be.